Anery A Bloodreds...

...Okay... so, upon seeing several references to a 'Raider' corn, and seeing it defined as an anery A bloodred, I'm not finding very many people involved in the creation of that name... (Joe, Hurley, Serp)... the one thread I saw the name discussion occuring in, it was a short side conversation rather than an all out open discussion about the naming of the morph.

Did I miss a thread or something? Was there a big discussion somewhere that I missed? I mean, the whole Snow Bloodred/Blizzard Bloodred naming thing has its own subject and thread...

-Kat

Well, there was the thread on "granite corns", but it seems that the name has been applied to several different morphs. (I personally liked the name for them, but don't really care, just stick with one.)

http://www.cornsnakes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14876

And then this one where people weighed in on the Raider name:

http://www.cornsnakes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15732

TBH, Hurley, I don't see too much support for the Raider name in that thread either. Not to mention neither thread has actually been about trying to find the morph's name, so people that might have been interested in giving input might miss it.

Let's start a true 'name the morph thread'.

I think it's only fair for people to have a say in the matter. If 'Raider' is appropriate, it will hold its own.

Current supporters of the name 'Raider': Joe, Serpwidgets, Hurley, and Drizzt_19.

Those against: Don Soderburg, Kat, Clint Boyer, Amanda E, Cornfan, Walter Smith, Alexandria Fox (sort of?)

And that's from digging through the 3 threads (the two you posted, and the snow blood/Avalanche one).

-Kat

Well, to be fair on this one, you'll need two threads, Kat.

1 - Those who oppose any trade name at all (Don Soderburg, Kat, Clint Boyer, Amanda E, Cornfan, Walter Smith, Alexandria Fox).

2 - Those who think it's ok to have a trade name besides the quasi scientific name(s) (Others).

(An intesting thread and lively to be sure... But, it doesn't stop the reality that people are going to apply trade names to some morphs. It's historically happened and will continue to do so.)

Then you need the thread that acknowledges that there are going to be people that will use a trade name, so let's avoid the multiple naming problems and settle on one. What's it to be? Apparently it wasn't interesting enough to post on until people started going with the one voted for most. Now, because they didn't bother to post before, it's no-fairsies. No one stopped anyone from talking about it before, they won't stop anyone now... so let's start it up again. If you're going to "do it right" and get "the official naming thread" going, I'd get both the threads running, because putting "no trade names ever" vs. "how about Raider for the trade name" is a moot point.

Apparently it wasn't interesting enough to post on until people started going with the one voted for most.

Click to expand...

Ever read/watch Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? Remember the part where they bulldozed Arthur Dent's house to make way for a freeway? Sure, the plans were on file, but he was never notified they existed and thus never got his say.

Granted, naming a morph isn't quite the same as bulldozing a house, but when a discussion is had without people knowing about it, it's not fair to say the decree was decided by the majority.

I object to the Raider name, but I object far more to the discussion being held between a small group of people in a couple of semi-obscure threads, and then the name being 'set in stone' from that small discussion.

-Kat

Hurley said:

Well, to be fair on this one, you'll need two threads, Kat.

1 - Those who oppose any trade name at all (Don Soderburg, Kat, Clint Boyer, Amanda E, Cornfan, Walter Smith, Alexandria Fox).

2 - Those who think it's ok to have a trade name besides the quasi scientific name(s) (Others).

Click to expand...

Well, as I've said I like just sticking with the genetic descriptions better than new names, but if there is to be a name change I would like a bit of input. As far as I'm concerned, Raiders was put out there and accepted by you and a few other people without a ton of talk. I think it should be mulled over for months not just a week or two. I'm not HORRIBLY opposed to a name change (my personal problem is I just don't like change of ANY kind) if there are many people involved, specifically Rich Zuchowski, Don Soderberg, and Kathy Love, among other well known breeders, and that there is a significant time period to talk it over.

Hurley said:

Apparently it wasn't interesting enough to post on until people started going with the one voted for most. Now, because they didn't bother to post before, it's no-fairsies. No one stopped anyone from talking about it before, they won't stop anyone now... so let's start it up again.

Click to expand...

Believe me I would have voiced a dissenting opinion on it had I seen it. I don't think it was talked about for a long enough time.

Hurley said:

So let's avoid the multiple naming problems and settle on one

Click to expand...

Let's not "just settle on it". At least not right away. I know Anery A Bloods have been around for a while already, but as far as I'm concerned there really hasn't been a HUGE discussion to settle the name change.

And just for the record, I like you Hurley, and Serp as well, but I must say that IMO, you both seem to want to be the ones to step in a make the decision without other people's say, especially if there aren't, in your or Serp's opinions, "better" names suggested. Maybe I'm a bit over-sensitive about this issue, and maybe it's just my problem with change, but I just wanted to make my say known.

Obscure? OK... Considering one was completely about Anery A bloods and the other was entitled Yearling Raider Corns... I think obscure is a bit much. It didn't have bold flashing red and green letters stickied at the top of the page, but it wasn't hidden. The threads were there, they were open to discussion, evidently someone was reading them, they have over 600 views combined.

But be that as it may, discuss.

Nothing is set in stone, language is ever evolving. There was no secret meeting or cloak and dagger plot afoot here.

The new threads are here, they're open as well. Please, everyone, post.

Topic A: Do you like trade names or think they shouldn't be allowed.

Topic B: If Anery Blood/Diffused/Whatever were to have a trade name, what do you like?

I must say that IMO, you both seem to want to be the ones to step in a make the decision without other people's say, especially if there aren't, in your or Serp's opinions, "better" names suggested. Maybe I'm a bit over-sensitive about this issue, and maybe it's just my problem with change, but I just wanted to make my say known.

Click to expand...

Make a decision without other people's say? If people don't talk, how are we supposed to hear their opinions? The only thing that has been discussed so far is whether or not people like trade names. Honestly, that's a moot point. If you don't like trade names, you won't use them. If you think trade names are easier/more fun/or you just plain like them, you will. That's an "agree to disagree" issue. People will have trade names and people will oppose them and neither side is wrong.

Anery bloods have popped up several times in the last few years with different trade names applied by different people advertising them or discussing them or whatever. It's not something that just popped up a month ago. The thought on the "granite" thread was to find out if that was a name for anery blood, is it a good one, will we have something we can agree on. Then granite shows up as a couple different morphs. :shrugs: Raider was put out in that thread. It was favorably accepted by some in another thread (quite honestly, it wasn't my choice of names, but I'd be happy if someone would just stick with one vs. me getting "my way" and "my name selected" or whatever). The thread petered out, apparently no one had anything else to say at the time... :shrugs:

So, since that was the best we had for acceptance of a name, we started using it. Nothing like putting it out there to bring people out of the woodwork and voice their opinions. I welcome it with open arms. If ya'll come up with some name you'd rather call them, fine. I can switch code easily enough, but you can't force me to use scientific names in all cases at all times any more than I can force you to use "Raider" or call your snows, "amelanistic anerythristics". It's just an attempt to get a trade name that most can live with. I and others have voiced opinions on the matter, and they are that. Opinions. Let's get more people in here taking the risk and putting their views in public. (If you don't post, you can't cry foul later.)

I'm not going to argue the "yes" vs. "no" on trade names point anymore. It won't be settled all in one favor or the other, and I don't think it has to be. That's like arguing the name Okeetee is locality vs. a look. You'll find two strong opinions for either side and neither is wrong.

As far as railroading...I'm trying to use the trade name that has shown the most acceptance so far and most recently. If one rises higher, I'll go with it, until then :shrugs: , it's just a name. Besides, it's got people talking about it.

I need to....

... re-phrase my opinion.

In the thread that Hurley started, I'm not totally against trade names. However, I am against coining a single name to a snake that is Double/Triple Homozygous for color AND pattern traits.

Example:

Butter X Motley = Butter Motley
Caramel X Stripe = Caramel Stripe
Amel X Aztec = Amel Aztec

We have never tried coin SINGLE trade names to these, as well as MANY other color/pattern combination traits, so why do we have to do it with Bloods?

I think a color (prefix) trait in combination to a pattern (suffix) trait explains the animal perfectly. We know what a Butter is and looks like and what a Motley is and looks like so when we hear Butter Motley, we know what to expect what the snake looks like.
This is what I meant by (prefix) SNOW and (suffix) BLOOD

Snow = Color
Blood = Pattern

If the name "Avalanche" was being coined to a simple color trait, then I would be all for it, then if we were trying to add the color prefix "Avalanche" to a pattern trait, then I would be for that as well.

Example:

Avalanche Motley

This way I would know that Avalanche would be the color trait combined with the Motley trait and both being displayed in the same snake.

So, I guess what I should have said is I'm not against a SINGLE TRADE NAME for color OR pattern traits, but I am when they are both displayed together in the same snake.

As far as Anery 'A' Bloods, I would think that just Anery Blood describes a Anery Blood. Why do we need to put the 'A' there. We already know Charcoal is the "TRADE NAME" for Anery 'B'.

By seeing or hearing this:

Anery Blood
Charcoal Blood

I know what to expect each snake to look like and what the genetic makeup is.

I hope everyone understands my explination and thoughts better on the subject of TRADE NAMES now.

Walter :wavey:

Very well said, Walter. I agree totally.

Hurley said:

(quite honestly, it wasn't my choice of names, but I'd be happy if someone would just stick with one vs. me getting "my way" and "my name selected" or whatever). The thread petered out, apparently no one had anything else to say at the time... :shrugs:

Click to expand...

Hurley said:

As far as railroading...I'm trying to use the trade name that has shown the most acceptance so far and most recently. If one rises higher, I'll go with it, until then :shrugs: , it's just a name. Besides, it's got people talking about it.

Click to expand...

Sorry about sounding rude. After I just read this post of yours I'm actually realizing I got things wrong. I'm glad to see your open to a discussion about this. I'm not sure why I got the bad vibe I got in the first place. :shrugs: Maybe its the whole "it's hard to tell someone's inflection in text" thing.

I hate to admit it since there is so much opposition, but I came up with the Raider Corn name for Anery A Bloods. All you can do with proposed names is throw them out there and see if they fly. I am a Raider Fan, so it works for me. I don’t put down people who hate football so I don’t understand why people put football fans down who love it. Different strokes for different folks. I have been looked down upon because I like snakes by the majority, which is kind of the same thing.

Raiders are Silver and Black and use a skull pattern in some of their logos. Pirates used the black and white flag with a skull on it and were referred to as Raiders at times. All Anery A Bloods do not have a skull pattern, but Bloods are known for that trait. This was my line of thought.

I honestly did not think it would fly. I just suggested it once on a tread and Chuck picked up on it. I have always thought that the poor Anery A gene has been left out. The only attempts at naming them has been Black Albino and Granite Corns. I know of three different attempts to use Granite Corns and none have stuck.

I think since Anery Motleys and Anery Striped are accepted names Anery Bloods will most likely be what we are stuck with. Walter made a good point about the combining of color and pattern genes. This is the way it has been done and will most likely continue to be done. There can be exceptions, however; like Pewters which has won over Charcoal Bloods. Pewter works because they look like pewter. Blizzard Bloods will work fine too.

Now when it comes to my baby, the Lavas, I may try other things, but popular opinion will weigh heavily on which names will be accepted in time. Time tested is the key to lasting names. I think that the old original genes and combos of genes will be difficult to rename when combined with other traits. The newer ones like Anery B, Sunkissed, Lava, Ultra, Ultramel, Lavender and others may have other ways to go. Like Walter said, Anery is Anery A and it doesn’t need to be said. Charcoal is Anery B, but wait, that is a trade name, so an argument for the wrong side, but it works better. Striped Charcoals not Anery B Stripes please.

We have talked about the Lava combo names on other threads, which is related here. Lava Bloods or Magma Corns. Striped Lavas/Aztec Lavas or Lava Flow Corns. Many people put down discussing names in advance of the morph really being readily available, but some very good ideas come up that may be used down the road. Kat suggested Magma Corns for Lava Corns. It came in second, but is a great name. I can not imagine me calling an Ice Blood, Lava Anery A Bloods, so the potential future morphs that will be created with these new genes, should be a consideration when names are chosen. I think Ice and Lava are useful to separated combos that exclude them from Hypo and Ghost, just like I think Charcoal/Pewters and Blizzards are useful trade names to separate them from Anery A and Snows.

We basically have the old world corn names and the new world corn names. When we combine old world names together, I thing that is what they will most likely be called, like Anery Bloods, and Snow Bloods. Where is the opposition to Glacier Corns which are Snow Lavenders?!!!! Come on be consistent. I guess that is a combo of old world and new world genes so who knows, like Lava Lavenders will be????? Ice Lavenders maybe.

As for the new world names, we are creating history at this very moment and I think we are doing a much better job than was none in the past, by our great discussions and debates about the issue. Coming up with names these days is much harder than it was to come up with Snow Corns or Ghost Corns. I know for a fact that we are not going to use a long listing of genetic names when it comes to triple, quad and quin homo corns that are not very far off in the future and many are already here.

What is Rich going to call a Hypo Sunkissed Anery A, or Hypo Sunkissed, Lav. We do have some problems now with names like Coral Snow and Sunglow Corns. Some are homo for Hypo and some are color traits. Some are even created with another hypo gene, like Strawberry. We have a lot of work to do, but publications are going to go a long way in helping with consistency. Kathy Loves Corn Snake Manuel, Chuck Pritzels, Corn snake Morph Guide, Connie’s, Something about Corns, News Letter and Reptile Magazine all help to bring all Corn Snake enthusiast closer to being on the same page.

And lastly, what do you guys think about Plasma Corns for Lavender Bloods? Stephen Roylance and I were discussing it, and this may be a good time to get other ideas for him or support. Plasma Corns might work better for Sunkissed Bloods, Ultra Bloods or Ultramel Bloods. I think when we combine old and new world genes together or new world genes together, we are entering into a completely new arena.

Plasma Corns

Though I love the name, it again goes away from using a color/pattern combo. Lavender Blood works just fine.....sure it may not make the best marketing name but I can live with that.

I really think Walter has the right direction on this and his definition/point of view makes sense.

My 2 cents,
Russ Bates

Sulfur Corns

What about Sulfur Corns that was suggested and being used for Butter Bloods? Will that be like Pewters or will there be objections?

Some names just seem to be obviously better than the genetic listings. One of the differences I see right away, is that one is a double homo mutant and the other is a triple. It is going to be hard to have very many names with three or four descriptive or genetic words in them. Butter Bloods works fine, and is only two words, so is Sulfur just perfect like Pewter is?

Sulfur Corns and Butter Bloods should be Amel Caramel Bloodred Corns if we want to stick with a genetic listing of genes. Is that what we really want to do, or is a balanced combo better.

Much like Walter said, I don't think it is as easy as thinking there is one group for trade names and one group against. Hurley forgot group 3, those who don't mind trade names when they are really needed, but want to stick with "scientific" names whenever possible. And there is group 4, those who are so new and have so much respect for some on this forum they think they are an overall authority and whatever they call a corn is what everyone else has to be calling them whether they like it or not. This last group puts a heavy responsibility for us to be more careful.
I for one am really glad we don't call Snows Amel Anerys, but maybe thats because I am accustomed to it. But we have all seemed to get used to Anery Blood, I never really heard anyone say it was bothersome or confusing, so why not leave well enough alone? There are going to be combinations popping up that are going to be a bear to say and a trade name may be called for, however, our chances of being universally unified greatly increases when we all use the correct terms or terms that are already widely accepted. I think everyone agrees it would be crazy to go switch trade names already existing but lets at least try to slow down the naming game.
It is almost as if it has come to "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em", and the mentallity is that "sure there will be unresponsible breeders out there that throw a name on everything, so we might as well name them something we like, or something we coined."
If we stick with the already existing names, a newer person could learn about the dozen or so recessive genes out there and walk up to someones table at a show and could pretty much figure out every combination on the table. Every new trade name we add makes it more difficult for them, and just leave more for us to explain when we are behind the table.
I think trade names do help a lot when they are selectively breed animals, such as Sunglows or Crimsons, but when we have an animals carrying multiple recessive traits, we should list those in the name whenever possible.
I do like the term "Avalanche", but the more I remember reading that Ball Python morph issue, the more sympathy I have gained for people just starting out in corns. The trade names made it very difficult for me to understand what anything was or how it could be inherited. I quickly lost interest because there was no universal "key" I could use. I see corns heading the same way.
***I edited part of this post because I realize the term Avalanche was proposed for Snow Bloods, not Blizzard Bloods, my bad. But I'd still like to keep it simple. My bad***
Anyway all in all, no hard feelings and Hurley, I even do need to get around to sending you my two frozen snakes. (I did loose the other one but didn't want to bother shipping around Christmas). I just think we are moving too fast and it just seems that we are having a "lets name this" thread at least once a month. Like Don said, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. :wavey:

Well, not being particularly sports oriented, I had no idea what "Raider" would look like in a corn snake. If we are going to use generic descriptive names, then we should use names that are as much as possible, of terms that would be pretty much universally recognized.

"Plasma" to me brings to mind a plasma arc welding torch I once had. I can't think of any particular cultivar of Corn Snake that would fit that description in my mind.

Maybe if we could get the Lavender Blood Reds the size of anacondas, the name "Purple People Eater" would fit well.

Yeah, I have to say that I don't care much for Plasma... I'm somewhat ambivalent about 'Avalanche'... It fits with the snow theme, but I'm not sure it's accurate for the typical snow blood (if there is such a thing yet)...

Sulfur sounds like a better match for butter bloodreds, and I have to say the pics have me agreeing with the Granite name for anerys...

But I can go either way on the name vs morph + pattern discussion. I think I'd prefer to leave the combos as morph + pattern until an appropriate name comes along, rather than assigning one quickly that doesn't really conjure up images of the morph...

-Kat

what do you breed with a creamsicle?

You might want to post this in a new thread.

i'm opposed to the raider corn name, but that's just b/c i think if it stuck then there could be a growing trend of naming new combos with teams names.

I had a picture exactly what a raider corn would look like, but i think it could also apply to aneries or charcoals. That's just me though. I think the Granite name fits it rather nicely.

I see what walter is saying about single name for pattern and color is not needed and could cause confusion. But, if the names are to stay seperate then i think people need to stay away from "blood" being used to describe the pattern and especially "bloodred". It descirbes the normal difused to a T, but if you were to tell me that someone had a "snow blood", i would think high white amel if i didnt already know better.

Anery A diffused suits them just fine to me, but so does Granite. So all in all, i think i just posted a lot to say that it doesnt really matter what i think.

my opinion is for genetic names unless a trade name is decided upon and fits the snake well. it makes everything alot easier to follow. my other thought is that once we get into quad homo genes etc... genetic names will become way too big (obviously) that is another time that trade names will need to come into play. it is just one of those things that really comes down to what works. in other words what i am saying is just what carol said as option 4 in one of the earlier posts, use "trade" names when needed, and use "scientific" names whenever possible.